Re: Can't tell the difference in operation between PATH_SCRIPT and NO_PATH_SCRIPT

[Steve Dondley <s@dondley.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1684 bytes --]

I guess I never realized that, when it comes to options, there is a difference between running a script directly and passing it as an argument to zsh. 

But even still, If I do this:

> echo $PATH
/usr/bin:./dir

> ls dir
-rwxr--r-- 1 root root 9 Jan 26 03:26 foo.zsh

> setopt pathscript

> zsh foo.zsh
zsh: can't open input file: foo.zsh

> unsetopt pathscript

> zsh foo.zsh
zsh: can't open input file: foo.zsh


So I’m still seeing no difference between execution of the script with path script on or off in these cases.

HOWEVER, I discovered if I put this in my .zshrc:

setopt pathscript

and do:

> zsh -i foo.zsh

It works.


Or, if I do

> setopt pathscript

and then do

> zsh -c foo.zsh

This also works.

> zsh -i foo.zsh wil also work in this case, too. 




> On Jan 25, 2024, at 10:45 PM, Lawrence Velázquez <larryv@zsh.org> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024, at 10:21 PM, Steve Dondley wrote:
>> Sorry, I’ve got a bad misconcepiton somewhere. I stil don’t get it.
>> 
>> I do: PATH=.dir
>> 
>> When I do: setopt pathscript
>> And then do: foo.zsh
>> 
>> It finds foo in the ./dir directory and executes it.
>> 
>> 
>> Then when i do: unsetopt pathscript
>> And then I do: foo.zsh
>> 
>> It stil finds foo.zsh in the ./dir directory.
>> 
>> So I’m not seeing how it behaves any differently. 
> 
> You doing something completely different from what I described and
> demonstrated.  PATH_SCRIPT *only* affects how zsh behaves when you
> invoke it to run a script (e.g., ''zsh script_name'').  It does not
> affect PATH searches performed as part of command execution.
> 
> -- 
> vq


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 22647 bytes --]